The Reluctant Fundamentalist suggest that nostalgia is more harmful than fundamentalism. To what extent is this true?
Mohsin Hamid’s novel, The Reluctant Fundamentalist, depicts the dangers of both nostalgia and fundamentalism. One would presume that fundamentalism especially that which leads to militant terrorism, would, without doubt, have far more devastating consequences than nostalgia. Yet Hamid forces his readers to consider how nostalgia can be destructive for individuals and nations and if not kept in check and how it can contribute to and exacerbate feelings and emotions. Hamid is warning his readers not to be complacent about nostalgia. Just like, fundamentalism, it is capable of irreparable damage.
Nostalgia is harmful for the individual if one becomes obsessed with the past. When the present is a struggling, the future is a murky place, people often look back into the beautiful and happy past. Such feeling can become irresistible, like “crack cocaine”. The dangerous situation that Hamid points out is Erica’s love for Chris. So wonderful the past of Erica with Chris beside was that she can never forgets him and keeps pulling herself into the world, where they live happily with together. “A guy with long, skinny fingers” becomes her home, where she feels she belongs. That is why, often, “she was utterly detached, lost in her own world”, seeming “otherworldly”. “She was disappearing into a powerful nostalgia”. Her own story, her own way of drowning into the past is “too compelling”. Without a way out of the deep past, she is “trapped”. She chooses to disappear in the present to live in the past, giving up her future. Her presumed death that imposes great sadness and sorrow on both her family and Changez. It can be seen that addictive nostalgia drags one’s life back, far from present and future, hinders one from standing up, making life better.
More seriously, when a nation becomes overly nostalgic it can restrict its ability to move forward and can trigger feelings of anger and resentment. The September 11 attacks stroke American with shock, loss, pain and frustration. After the attacks, New York was invaded by flags. “America was increasingly giving itself over to dangerous nostalgia”, for the time of unquestioned dominance, safety and moral certainty. To seek revenge, to regain the position of the supreme and strongest empire in the past, America spread war and wreaked havoc to other races and countries. Discrimination came back because of suspicion and fear of potential terrorists. Changez was stripped checked at the airport and treated as a prisoner. “Pakistani cabdrivers were beaten to within an inch of their lives”. Afghanistan was bombed. India and Pakistan conflict was interfered. America had to suffer the pain and it was so ready to cause the same pain to other countries and thousands of innocents just to demonstrate that it is undefeatable. Is this justice of inhumanity? Indeed, nostalgia blinded its path. “[America] retreated into myths of [its] own difference, assumptions of [its] own superiority”. This excessive nostalgia made Changez “trembled with fury”. His fury turned into the determination to stop America despite his initial love.
A closer look at what America had been doing, was that the action of political fundamentalism? Following principles – wars and interferences to wipe out terrorism in the world, ignoring people lives in other countries, striving to bring back the dominant empire was what America did. Nostalgia created the desire and the desire was practised by fundamentalism. Implicitly, nostalgia triggered fundamentalism and together brought destruction and pain.
On the other hand, nostalgia can soothe and act as a salve when it is put in the right place. Nostalgia is remembering the past of pleasure and excellence, the past of good things. It helps people feel better. Changez tends to “become sentimental” when thinking of New York. “It still occupies a place of great fondness in [his] heart”. His nostalgia can be one of the reasons why he treats the American with hospitability and politeness, telling his story with such proud and interest. It is, may be, because of Changez star life in America that alleviate his hatred towards it. Despite his resolution to stop America, he is still “a believer in nonviolence; the spilling of blood is abhorrent to [him], save in self-defence”. His nostalgic feelings makes Changez less likely a terrorist. Perhaps, this time, nostalgia has an appeasing effect.
In his novel, Hamid also suggests that not only terrorism but also economic fundamentalism can cause disparity and feelings of anger. Changez works for Underwood Samson where he has to “focus on the fundamentals”. He is trained to become “pragmatic and effective”, caring all about the “maximum return” with no compassion towards others people. How adamant is the principle! Nevertheless, Changez seems to struggle with sympathy. He knows that his evaluation, his making living, can make the cable company workers become unemployed, disrupting others’ lives. Besides, “finance was a primary means by which the American empire exercised its power”. There comes a great difference and distance between living standards and economy in different countries. Changez does compare his city with Manila and New York. “Such comparisons trouble [him]…they made [him] resentful”. In the end, Changez realised that he is the modern janissary for the American empire. Even though he works hard for America, he is still treated with suspicion after the September attacks. Even though he contribute to America, his country is on the verge of war because of America’s interference. All that matters to economic fundamentalism is money, not people, and as the consequence, the vast inequality exist, intriguing animosity.
Hamid shows the inherent danger of chronic nostalgia. His novel serves as a warning to individuals and to the USA to not fall victim of glorifying their past. However, Hamid is not dismissing the harm of both economic and political fundamentalism can cause. His novel shows that he does not condone the September 11 attacks, and indeed, seeks to highlight how extreme points of view can have disastrous consequences. Whilst nostalgia has its place, Hamid wants his readers to consider the link between nostalgia and fundamentalism in order to understand the actions of others and our recent history. Hamid’s use of unreliable narrator, Changez forces the readers to examine their fears and reconsider their assumptions of exactly what causes harm in our world.